•  
  •  
 

Reforma Alutsista dan Sumber Daya Alam: Menjawab Tantangan Hukum Internasional dan Perdamaian Dunia

Abstract

This study departs from the paradox of the failure to achieve world peace despite the existence of an established international legal regime. It addresses three main objectives: (1) identifying the key factors that undermine world peace; (2) analyzing the failure factors of international law to realize global peace; and (3) formulating a responsive international legal architecture to future peace agendas. The study employs a critical descriptive method with a socio-legal (non-doctrinal) approach, drawing on the analytical frameworks of neorealism, great powers oligarchy, and Third World Approaches to International Law (TWAIL). The qualitative analysis is conducted by examining power relations, the distribution of natural resources, and the configuration of global military capabilities. The findings reveal that the anarchic structure of the international system constitutes the primary driver of global conflicts as reflected in World War I and II. Furthermore, the dominance of the Permanent Five (P-5) has produced a great powers oligarchy that distorts the principles of international law and obstructs world peace. This study argues that reforming the distribution of military capabilities and access to natural resources is a crucial prerequisite for non-P-5 states to reconstruct international law. Accordingly, a redesign of the architecture of international law is needed to make it more just, inclusive, and balanced global distribution of power orientation as a foundation for sustainable world peace.

Bahasa Abstract

Studi ini berangkat dari sebuah paradoks belum tercapainya perdamaian dunia di tengah kemapanan rezim hukum internasional. Studi ini fokus pada 3 hal yaitu: (1) mengidentifikasi elemen utama yang mengguncang perdamaian dunia; (2) menganalisis faktor penyebab kegagalan hukum internasional dalam mewujudkan perdamaian global; serta (3) merumuskan arsitektur hukum internasional yang lebih responsif terhadap agenda perdamaian di masa depan. Studi ini menggunakan metode deskriptik kritis dengan pendekatan sosio-legal (non-doktrinal) mengacu pada kerangka analisis neorealisme, great powers oligarchy, dan Third World Approaches to International Law (TWAIL). Analisis kualitatif dilakukan terhadap dinamika relasi kekuasaan, distribusi sumber daya alam (SDA), serta konfigurasi militer global. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa struktur sistem internasional anarkis yang ditopang oleh ketimpangan penguasaan alat utama sistem persenjataan (alutsista) dan SDA menjadi faktor utama terjadinya konflik global sebagaimana peristiwa Perang Dunia I dan II. Selanjutnya, dominasi negara-negara Permanent Five (P-5) telah membentuk sebuah great powers oligarchy berpotensi mendistorsi prinsip-prinsip hukum internasional dan menghambat terwujudnya perdamaian dunia. Studi ini menegaskan bahwa reformasi distribusi alutsista dan akses terhadap SDA merupakan prasyarat penting bagi negara-negara di luar P-5 untuk melakukan dekonstruksi dan rekonstruksi hukum internasional. Studi ini menegaskan perlunya redesain arsitektur hukum internasional yang lebih adil, inklusif, dan berorientasi pada keseimbangan kekuasaan global sebagai fondasi bagi perdamaian dunia.

References

Artikel jurnal

Arjakas, Merili, Hille Hanso, Kai Kaarelson, Ivan U.K. Klyszcz, and Solveig Niitra. Global Trends in Development Cooperation. Estonia’s Role in the Changing Architecture of International Development Cooperation. International Centre for Defence and Security (ICDS), 2025. http://www.jstor.org/stable/resrep71254.7.

Bindra, Sukhwant S. “Analysing Foreign Policy: A Theoretical Perspective.” World Affairs: The Journal of International Issues 23, no. 3 (2019): 26–43. https://www.jstor.org/stable/48531048.

Blackshire‑Belay, Carol Aisha. “German Imperialism in Africa: The Distorted Images of Cameroon, Namibia, Tanzania, and Togo.” Journal of Black Studies 23, no. 2 (1992): 235–46. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2784532. 

Cordesman, Anthony H. Iranian Nuclear Program. The Global Nuclear Balance: Nuclear Forces and Key Trends in Nuclear Modernization. Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), 2023. http://www.jstor.org/stable/resrep48860.11.

Cronin, Patrick M, and Ryan Neuhard. China’s Political Warfare Campaign in the South China Sea. Total Competition: China’s Challenge in the South China Sea. Center for a New American Security, 2020. http://www.jstor.org/stable/resrep20439.5.

Davis, Belinda. Review of Experience, Identity, and Memory: The Legacy of World War I, by Stéphane Audoin-Rouzeau, Annette Becker, Helen McPhail, Susan R. Grayzel, John Horne, Alex King, Giovanna Procacci, et al. The Journal of Modern History 75, no. 1 (2003): 111–31. https://doi.org/10.1086/377750.

Dennett, Tyler. “Japan Quits the League.” Current History (1916-1940) 38, no. 2 (1933): 252–56. http://www.jstor.org/stable/45337190.

Deringil, Selim. “The Preservation of Turkey’s Neutrality during the Second World War: 1940.” Middle Eastern Studies 18, no. 1 (1982): 30–52. http://www.jstor.org/stable/4282867.

Eagleton, Clyde. “The United Nations: Aims and Structure.” The Yale Law Journal 55, no. 5 (1946): 974–96. https://doi.org/10.2307/792749.

Gompert, David C, Hans Binnendijk, and Bonny Lin. “The U.S. Invasion of Iraq, 2003.” In Blinders, Blunders, and Wars: What America and China Can Learn, 161–74. RAND Corporation, 2014. http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.7249/j.ctt1287m9t.21.  

Hatuel‑Radoshitzky, Michal. Criticism of the UN Security Council Veto Mechanism: Ramifications for Israel. Institute for National Security Studies, 2015. http://www.jstor.org/stable/resrep08280.

Jervis, Robert. “Hans Morgenthau, Realism, and the Scientific Study of International Politics.” Social Research 61, no. 4 (1994): 853–76. http://www.jstor.org/stable/40971063.

Jones, Seth G. Regular Military Power. Containing Tehran: Understanding Iran’s Power and Exploiting Its Vulnerabilities. Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), 2020. http://www.jstor.org/stable/resrep29480.7.

Kaiman, Charles. “PTSD in the World War II Combat Veteran.” The American Journal of Nursing 103, no. 11 (2003): 32–42. http://www.jstor.org/stable/29745429.

Levy, Ivan. “The United Nations (in) Security Council: Time for Reform in a Post-Ukraine War World?” Journal of International Affairs 75, no. 1 (2022): 169–76. https://www.jstor.org/stable/27203127.

Malik, Waleed. “Israeli Aggression: Perspectives, Policies, and Projected Scenarios.” Policy Perspectives 21, no. 2 (2024): 1–30. https://www.jstor.org/stable/48826373.

McLean, Roderick R. “Kaiser Wilhelm II and the British Royal Family: Anglo-German Dynastic Relations in Political Context, 1890–1914.” History 86, no. 284 (2001): 478–502. http://www.jstor.org/stable/24425539.  

Mommsen, Wolfgang J. “Kaiser Wilhelm II and German Politics.” Journal of Contemporary History 25, no. 2/3 (1990): 289–316. http://www.jstor.org/stable/260734.

Morel, E.D. “The Curse of Versailles Treaty.” Current History (1916-1940) 19, no. 1 (1923): 39–44. http://www.jstor.org/stable/45329529. 

Nevins, Allan. “Germany Quits the League.” Current History (1916-1940) 39, no. 3 (1933): 327–32. http://www.jstor.org/stable/45334480.

Pettersson, Therése, and Peter Wallensteen. “Armed Conflicts, 1946–2014.” Journal of Peace Research 52, no. 4 (2015): 536–50. http://www.jstor.org/stable/24557437.

Poole, DeWitt C. “Light on Nazi Foreign Policy.” Foreign Affairs 25, no. 1 (1946): 130–54. https://doi.org/10.2307/20030025.

Reardon, Robert J. Iran’s Nuclear Program: Past, Present, and Future. In Containing Iran: Strategies for Addressing the Iranian Nuclear Challenge, 9–64. RAND Corporation, 2012. http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.7249/j.ctt1q60rb.10.

Reynolds, David. “The Origins of the Two ‘World Wars’: Historical Discourse and International Politics.” Journal of Contemporary History 38, no. 1 (2003): 29–44. http://www.jstor.org/stable/3180695.

Ross, Robert S. “Nationalism, Geopolitics, and Naval Expansionism: From the Nineteenth Century to the Rise of China.” Naval War College Review 71, no. 4 (2018): 10–44. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26607088.

Seltzer, William. “Population Statistics, the Holocaust, and the Nuremberg Trials.” Population and Development Review 24, no. 3 (1998): 511–52. https://doi.org/10.2307/2808153.

Vasquez, John A. “The Causes of the Second World War in Europe: A New Scientific Explanation.” International Political Science Review 17, no. 2 (1996): 161–78. http://www.jstor.org/stable/1601301. 

Waltz, Kenneth N.  “REALIST THOUGHT AND NEOREALIST THEORY.” Journal of International Affairs 44, no. 1 (1990): 21–37. http://www.jstor.org/stable/24357222.

Wheeler, Sally. “Socio-Legal Studies in 2020.” Journal of Law and Society 47 (2020): S209–26. https://www.jstor.org/stable/48635154.

Williamson, Samuel R. “The Origins of World War I.” The Journal of Interdisciplinary History 18, no. 4 (1988): 795–818. https://doi.org/10.2307/204825.

Wiratraman, Herlambang P. “The Challenges of Teaching Comparative Law and Socio-Legal Studies at Indonesia’s Law Schools.” Asian Journal of Comparative Law 14, no. S1 (2019): S229–44. https://doi.org/10.1017/asjcl.2019.15.

Wouters, Jan, and Tom Ruys. Use and Abuse of the Veto Power. Security Council Reform: A New Veto for A New Century? Egmont Institute, 2005. http://www.jstor.org/stable/resrep06699.5.

Wouters, Jan, and Tom Ruys. Veto Reform Proposals. Security Council Reform: A New Veto for A New Century? Egmont Institute, 2005. http://www.jstor.org/stable/resrep06699.6.

Wright, Herbert. “The Legality of the Annexation of Austria by Germany.” The American Journal of International Law 38, no. 4 (1944): 621–35. https://doi.org/10.2307/2192795.

Buku

Chimni, B. S. International Law and World Order: A Critique of Contemporary Approaches. New Delhi: Sage Publications. 1993.

O’Brien, Phillips Payson. The Strategists: Churchill, Stalin, Roosevelt, Mussolini, and Hitler. New York: Dutton. 2024.

O'Brien, Phillips Payson. War and Power: Who Wins Wars—and Why. New York: PublicAffairs. 2025.

Shaw, Malcolm N. International Law (9th ed). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 2021.

Wylie, Neville (ed.). European Neutrals and Non-Belligerents during the Second World War. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 2002.

Smithsonian Institution. World War II Map by Map. London: Dorling Kindersley. 2019.

Dosenrode, Søren (ed.). World War 1: The Great War and its Impact. Online edition. Aalborg Universitetsforlag. 2018.

Peraturan perundang-undangan

United Nations Charter 1945

United Nations Security Council Resolution No. 267

United Nations Security Council Resolution No. 1737

United Nations Security Council Resolution No. 1747

United Nations Security Council Resolution No. 1803

Artikel koran dan media

The Guardian. ‘How effective was the US attack on Iran’s nuclear sites? A visual guide.’ https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/jun/22/how-effective-was-the-us-attack-on-irans-nuclear-sites-a-visual-guide.  (diakses 23 Juni 2025).

The New York Times. ‘[Headline re: Iran response/ceasefire chance]’. https://www.nytimes.com/2025/06/23/world/middleeast/iran-response-ceasefire-chance.html.  (diakses 27 Juni 2025).

Internet

Global Firepower — previous global ranks. https://www.globalfirepower.com/global-ranks-previous.php. (diakses 23 Juni 2025).

Research.un.org - Quick reference: Number of draft resolutions vetoed by permanent members. https://research.un.org/en/docs/sc/quick.  (diakses 22–23 Juni 2025).

Statista. Leading countries based on natural resource value. https://www.statista.com/statistics/748223/leading-countries-based-on-natural-resource-value/.  (diakses 23 Juni 2025).

Wardhana, Agastya. ‘AS serang Iran: Dosen UNAIR beberkan dampaknya terhadap stabilitas politik global.’ https://unair.ac.id/as-serang-iran-dosen-unair-beberkan-dampaknya-terhadap-stabilitas-politik-global/.  (diakses 28 Juni 2025).

This document is currently not available here.

Share

COinS